Code On Network Coding For 5G Evolution PDF

Network Coding: Evolving to 5G

Using Random Linear Network Coding to Enable a Seamless 5G Upgrade

Overview
The purpose of this white paper is to explain how coding algorithms, and specifically network codes,
can enable a seamless, software-‐based upgrade to 5G Networks.
The NGNM Alliance, a group of service providers working cooperatively on 5G requirements, define 5G
network performance as needing “much greater throughput, much lower latency, ultra-‐high reliability,
much higher connectivity density, and higher mobility range. This enhanced performance is expected
to be provided along with the capability to control a highly heterogeneous environment, and capability
to, among others, ensure security and trust, identity, and privacy.”
The use cases in this white paper show how NGNM’s objectives can be achieved through a proprietary
network code called Random Linear Network Coding (RLNC). RLNC improves network efficiency by
simplifying its operations. As stated by the brilliant computer scientist and the designer of today’s
routing algorithms, Dijkstra:
“Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability.”

The use cases also show how RLNC from Code On[1] can provide greater throughput, increased security,
and improved battery life extension and user experience in mobile devices. RLNC is a breakthrough
coding algorithm that enables a new category of codes called network codes which extend beyond
traditional channel codes by improving efficiencies in both network and storage systems.

RLNC provides order-‐of-‐magnitude improvement wherever data is transported or stored. Among state-‐
of-‐the art codes, it is most capable of removing a network’s inefficient redundancy. Moreover, its
versatility enables new modes of communications, including novel protocols and powerful
performance and reliability tools, in the most complex environments and topologies (e.g., satellite,
wireless offload/backhaul, wireless mesh)[2]. These innovations will be critical tools for 5G networks.
By simplifying network operations, RLNC
enables innovative combinations with source
codes and powerful design tradeoffs involving
reliability, latency, complexity, and energy.
RLNC insures optimal speed and reliability in a
variety of applications and a range of devices.
It is complementary with source codes in the
way it optimizes digital storage and
distribution to insure the highest possible
quality, given the underlying network or media
losses and latencies. This paper illustrates how
RLNC can be used to improve network
efficiency for optimal data and media delivery
across heterogeneous devices and networks.
Code On Proprietary and Confidential 1

Random Linear Network Coding Use-‐Cases
Use Case 1: Improving the Mobile User Experience from the Application Layer
Managing Network Latency in Streaming, End-‐to-‐End Multimedia Applications
RLNC optimally delivers media content in end-‐to-‐end
systems, thus enabling higher Quality of Experience
(QoE) to media customers. RLNC has shown
significant latency gains in multimedia streaming
applications[3]. The discussed implementations can be
tuned for both long distances (e.g., data center to
home theatre) and short distances (e.g., between
devices in a home network).
Several application-‐layer implementations of RLNC
have shown the unique ability to provide reliability
while guaranteeing exceptionally low latencies.
Compared to conventional channel codes, RLNC has
shown latency reductions of at least 4x[3]. These latency gains are made possible by RLNC’s unique
capability to code on the fly or in a sliding-‐window (see Appendix 1 & 2).
Use Case 2: Reducing Network Congestion at the Transport Layer
Boosting Multimedia Streaming through RLNC’s Protocol-‐Friendly Enhancements
RLNC provides powerful protocol-‐enhancement
capabilities that significantly increase the
performance of transport networks, thus enabling
media streams to carry higher video and audio
qualities using the same resources. For example,
Coded TCP combines the reliability of RLNC with TCP’s
congestion control algorithms to minimize latencies.
RLNC-‐enhanced protocols can be applied across the
content distribution network. Within LTE, and
eventually 5G, they extend cell coverage or increase
coverage density by 2.5x. They also improve
throughput in crowded WiFi settings such as airports,
coffee shops, libraries, or buildings with interfering WiFi networks[7,9].
TCP, the protocol representing the majority of Internet traffic and almost all streaming video, may back
off unnecessarily when faced with random packet losses. Coded TCP is capable of handling random
losses by inhibiting TCP’s inefficient back-‐off instances, thus allowing efficient use of available
bandwidth[2]. This is particularly relevant for multimedia streaming applications: Even with 20% packet
losses over a 25Mbps link, a user can watch streaming video without experiencing any buffer
overruns[7]. Coded TCP has shown similar streaming gains in proxy configurations. In a recent multi-‐
continental Coded TCP trial, large-‐scale download speed tests were undertaken where thousands of
consumer devices connected to the Internet through commercial WiFi and cellular networks. The result
was an average 5x speed gain compared to conventional TCP. These gains are made possible by RLNC’s
unique capability to code in a sliding-‐window, as illustrated in Appendix 2.


Use Case 3: Boosting User Experience in Remote Locations
Maximizing Bandwidth Utilization and Stabilizing Throughput in Satellite Links
RLNC transforms the Quality of Experience (QoE) of
media consumers sharing satellite links, without need
for bandwidth upgrades.
In a recent implementation, RLNC was used to carry
Internet services via satellite to a group of Pacific
islands. The coded IP-‐layer tunnel was designed to
operate without feedback. The latest results
demonstrate that RLNC improves link utilization by up
to 50%, enabling goodput performance gains reaching
4x[20]. An important byproduct of RLNC is to stabilize
the link’s overall goodput by reducing bandwidth
utilization swings. In a remarkable demonstration of
improved user experience through a mere software patch, RLNC had successfully ushered high-‐
definition (HD) video onto some of the islands for the first time.
In an alternative implementation, coding TCP connections individually has demonstrated goodput gain
factors reaching 20x over conventional TCP in emulated satellite links[8].
RLNC has also demonstrated gains in satellite relaying and multi beam communications. In addition to
remote-‐location Internet access, potential RLNC applications include maritime communications and
inflight connectivity.
Use Case 4: Improving Throughput with Superior Multicast Protocols

Realizing Superior Broadcast Quality through RLNC
RLNC enables multimedia content to be broadcast at
higher QoE to larger audiences. RLNC was also shown
to enables powerful Quality of Experience (QoE)
tradeoffs in access and multicast networks,
particularly in minimizing interruption in media
playback as well as the number of initially buffered
packets (initial waiting time)[4,5]. Compared to state-‐
of-‐the-‐art reliable multicasting protocols, RLNC-‐
enabled broadcast was also shown to accommodate
larger networks while delivering 30-‐50% lower
latencies (see Appendix 3).
RLNC broadcasting finds important applications in
satellite broadcasting networks. Using limited NACK feedback, RLNC-‐based protocols achieve 2x the
throughput of conventional systems with 100 receivers and 5% losses. (The gain factor climbs to 6x
with 50% losses).
Other multicasting applications include content distribution networks, IPTV broadcasting, stadium
wireless networks, cable systems (DOCSIS), and DSL. RLNC was also implemented successfully in WiFi
multicasting applications, where important energy savings were demonstrated in mobile devices.


Use Case 5: Coded Multi-‐Path, Enabling Virtualized Infrastructure and Seamless Offload
Boosting User Experience through RLNC Multi-‐Path
A common misperception about today’s Internet is
that data packets flow between routers and switches
opportunistically, down optimal paths in the network.
The reality is that 99.9% of a given communication
flows over exactly the same path, yielding significant
network inefficiencies. In today’s protocols, the state
of each packet in transit is tracked to guarantee data
packet arrival (e.g., TCP), an expensive and complex
procedure.
In addition to operating as a channel code, RLNC
addresses the root of the problem by eliminating the
need for tracking the state of each individual packet.
RLNC’s stateless communications eliminate administrative complexity and enables multipath
communications. RLNC implementations demonstrate significant gains in throughput in multipath
scenarios. For example, RLNC Multi-‐Path TCP (MPTCP) goodput gains reach 11x[6] compared to TCP.
Through its offloading capabilities, RLNC combines LTE/5G reliability with WiFi bandwidths, thus
improving user QoE. An example is illustrated in Appendix 4, where a receiver is able to receive a
stream using both its WiFi and LTE/5G networks. In this case, RLNC offload capabilities not only provide
higher data throughput, but also allow networks to minimize transport costs. Hence, RLNC allows
devices to get the benefits of a full cellular connection for a fraction (a few percent) of the cellular
cost[11].
Combining multiple paths with RLNC duplicates connection capacity while maintaining reliability and
management simplicity. Data might be transmitted simultaneously over WiFi and LTE/5G, cable and
LTE/5G, LTE/5G and DSL, two DSL lines, or multiple WiFi channels (see Appendix 4). In a home theatre,
for example, RLNC enables devices fitted with multiple WiFi interfaces to multiply their WiFi bandwidth
without need for major inter-‐channel scheduling.
Use Case 6: RLNC’s Inherent Security

RLNC as a Security and Content Protection Mechanism
RLNC is a powerful natural complement to the
traditional encryption methods used for content
protection.
RLNC insures that decoding cannot be performed
without a pre-‐determined number of coded packets.
As a consequence, sending packets through multiple
paths creates an additional level of protection against
eavesdropping. The figure (right) illustrates this in a
scenario where content is broadcast through a
satellite to a set top box. However, a small portion of
the content is streamed through the consumer’s
broadband Internet connection. In this case, RLNC can
be used to insure that the broadcast content is unusable without the low-‐bandwidth component.

Distributing coded content across multiple locations plays a similar role in storage and content
distribution networks, as long as no single location or drive holds enough information to decode. A
carefully designed RLNC system thus inherently offers powerful tools to control access to content.
Furthermore, the encryption of RLNC coefficients effectively locks the whole payload. In the context of
multi-‐resolution video delivery, RLNC coefficient encryption significantly reduces server loads while
providing viable content protection even through high loss links[15].
Use Case 7: RLNC’s New Ultra-‐High Reliability Tools

Coded Multi-‐hop Networks: Shifting the Network Paradigm with RLNC Recoding

RLNC randomly generates its coding coefficients and embeds them within the data for transport and
storage. These unique features enable RLNC to re-‐encode coded packets at different network nodes
and layers without need for prior decoding. A recoding node can combine received coded packets using
locally generated random coefficients. Consequently, it can react to local network degradation instantly
by inserting additional parity (coded) packets into the media stream, as shown in the figure above.
Recoding does not increase decoding complexity. (See Appendix 5 for a detailed example of recoding.)
RLNC’s recoding process has been demonstrated to significantly improve network efficiently and
reliability in Software Defined Networking (SDN). Recent SDN implementations demonstrate
considerable improvements for RLNC in multihop networks[6]. This study of fundamental multihop
topologies shows that simple IP-‐layer recoding strategies enable networks to realize performance
boosts in TCP without modifying the overlaying end-‐to-‐end transport protocol. The results demonstrate
TCP goodput gains above 3x[6], achieved through RLNC’s unique recoding capabilities.
RLNC multi-‐hop gains apply at both the network core and edge, with significant throughput and latency
gains in local wireless meshes (e.g., WiFi metro/home network, home theatre setup, etc.).
Use Case 8: Mesh Networking to Improve the User’s Media Experience
ABR Optimization in Wireless Mesh Settings
Future home network setups are
increasingly featuring multiple
playback devices. For reliable
operation, such devices may need
to function as a coordinated
wireless mesh, as shown in the
home theatre illustration (right).
Recent work has demonstrated
that RLNC-‐based protocols offer
significant Quality of Experience (QoE) gains when carrying ABR video over such a wireless mesh[16]. The

RLNC testbed uses a reference implementation of the Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP (DASH)
client, along with a standard server setup, where all HTTP traffic is carried by TCP.
At typical WiFi loss levels (2%), RLNC enables DASH to achieve a 30% higher bitrate while removing all
playback interruptions. At higher losses (10%), RLNC allows the DASH client to run at 4x its uncoded
bitrate while reducing the duration of video interruption by one order of magnitude. Note that similar
RLNC gains apply for a number of tested TCP variants[16].
A number of unique RLNC features are used in this setup. The RLNC-‐based protocol enables the full
exploitation of the mesh by simplifying the participation of "helper" nodes[16]. The latter automatically
form local relay topologies and use recoding to maximize link efficiency and robustness. In addition, the
protocol makes full use of RLNC's flexible encoding schemes[16,17] (see Appendix 2).
The above gains extend to wireless ad-‐hoc networks, where significant throughput and latency
improvements were demonstrated in the context of vehicular and sensor networks, suggesting that
RLNC is an unavoidable evolutionary step towards the Internet-‐of-‐Things (IoT).
Use Case 9: Edge Caching with RLNC, Towards Cache Meshing and Cooperation
RLNC Recoding, a CDN Game-‐Changer
RLNC’s recoding feature can be used to
dramatically improve CDN efficiency.
Caching is used broadly within CDNs to
distribute content more efficiently. Owing
to cheaper and more powerful storage and
computing at the network edge (e.g., set
top boxes, gaming platforms), edge devices
are increasingly playing a caching role.
The figure (right) shows a typical CDN
multicast architecture with multiple tiers of
caches. To illustrate the value of RLNC’s
recoding capabilities, red links are each
assumed to exhibit 5% packet losses.
Restricted by their end-‐to-‐end structures, conventional block and rateless codes need to process
cumulative packet losses at the receiver (see Appendix 5). This results in the transmission of the worst-‐
case overhead (above 15%) to all customers, regardless of whether such overhead is needed. This is an
expensive requirement, given bandwidth scarcity. Owing to recoding, RLNC can inject redundancy as
needed at the link level, resulting in optimal overhead and throughput over all links.
Combining its recoding and meshing capabilities, RLNC enables true edge cache clustering and
cooperation. RLNC also provides large coding speedups for storage and CDN applications compared to
competing coding libraries, as illustrated in Appendix 6.
Use Case 10: RLNC’s Seamless User Experience in a Highly Heterogeneous Network
Coded Multiresolution Transport
Compared to single-‐layer transcoding techniques, layered coding helps reduce storage costs and
bandwidth consumption, enabling the distribution of higher-‐quality multimedia. RLNC allows
multimedia distribution networks to use the native scaling video coding of H.264 or the emerging H.265
standards to reduce or obviate the current need for sophisticated rate measurements and resolution

adjustments. This simplifies considerably the
management of multimedia distribution. RLNC-‐based
multi-‐resolution schemes yield significant data
availability and transport efficiency gains[12,13,14].
For multi-‐resolution content distribution, RLNC
enables the following features (see Appendix 7):
• Proactive adjustment of both resolution and
reliability overhead to network conditions.
• Dynamic adjustment of resolution while
protecting high-‐priority layers/channels (e.g.,
base layer), even in broadcast scenarios.
• Allocating reliability overhead dynamically across multiple layers/channels.
• More efficient bandwidth use, hence serving higher-‐quality content to heterogeneous devices.
• More efficient storage of multi-‐resolution content.
Use Case 12: Towards Mobile Storage and Millisecond Latency

RLNC: Harnessing the Global Storage Infrastructure
Today’s global network boasts massive storage
infrastructure, including not only data centers and
edge caches, but also service-‐provider network caches
and customer storage. Despite the widespread use of
content replication and edge caching, failures such as
CloudFare’s one-‐hour outage on March 3rd, 2013[21],
have become a regular feature of the cloud-‐service
landscape.
RLNC brings significant performance gains and energy
savings to storage systems at the drive, the SAN, and
the cloud level. Using minimal overhead, RLNC
increases the availability and security of data stored
across multiple drives/clouds. Recent RLNC implementations show download speed gains reaching 50%
over conventional replication methods, across multiple cloud storage providers[22].
Coding across data blocks improves robustness against drive and transmission failures. By removing
state tracking (see Appendix 4 & 5), RLNC is provoking a qualitative leap in drive repair and dynamic
data reconstruction technology. In dynamic caching scenarios, RLNC is shown to consume 2.5x less
transport and 1.25x less storage resources than conventional codes[23].
Furthermore, RLNC is a green technology, as it reduces data center energy consumption by 20-‐50%
through curtailing transaction times and required storage[24]. RLNC’s coding speedups (see Appendix 6)
have been demonstrated for both Intel and ARM chipsets, where the multi-‐platform RLNC library is
compatible with hardware acceleration[25].
By allowing the decoding of coded data blocks in quasi-‐arbitrary order and in combination with
uncoded data, RLNC has not only added flexibility to distributed storage systems; it has become a
powerful tool for storage virtualization[2]. Furthermore, RLNC’s simplified management ushers a new
era of storage mobility, where content is finally as mobile as the customer, shadowing their very
movement.

Conclusion
RLNC is a next generation coding algorithm that is crucial to realize the network operating efficiencies
required by 5G Networks: a breakthrough in throughput, latency, reliability, mobility, and security. It is
also the first code capable of optimizing both storage and transport networks, a vital feature as 5G
networks increasingly combine their storage and network applications.
RLNC is uniquely versatile compared to conventional codes, as it can be implemented through software
patches at any layer of the network. Consequently, it can be applied opportunistically, enabling a
gradual pay-‐as-‐you-‐grow network evolution towards 5G. It is therefore a key ingredient enabling the
graceful 5G migration of today’s infrastructure, without requiring forklift upgrades.

For more information, please contact:
Laila Partridge – Managing Director, Code On – lp@code-‐on-‐technologies.com – 781-‐856-‐5338
Kerim Fouli – VP of Technology, Code On – fouli@code-‐on-‐technologies.com – 781-‐414-‐0541

Appendices
Appendix 1
End-‐to-‐End Coding with RLNC
End-‐to-‐end is the simplest RLNC configuration, with an encoder at the source and a decoder at the
destination. In this simple topology, RLNC operates as a classical channel code, albeit featuring a
number of unique advantages. For instance, RLNC can be implemented at any layer of the network
stack and has most commonly been utilized at the application layer. In a typical application-‐layer
implementation, the encoder is located either at the source of the content or at an intermediate
(proxy) location within the network, while the decoder resides at a destination device. Application-‐
layer RLNC implementations have demonstrated 5x throughput improvements at 3% packet losses.
Even with 20% packet losses over a 25Mbps link, RLNC devices can stream video without experiencing
any buffer overruns[2].
Figure 1 shows the expected positioning of the RLNC encoding and decoding modules with respect to
media source encoding and decoding processes. The role of RLNC here is to deliver the source-‐coded
stream reliably across the service provider’s network.
Figure 1 End-‐to-‐End Coding
RLNC can make use of a pre-‐existing packetization structure or generate its own packets from an input
bitstream. This is illustrated in Figure 2, a simplified block diagram showing the operations of the RLNC
encoder and decoder modules of Figure 1. Since packets entering the encoding process are assumed to
be of equal size, an optional packetization stage may be required for functions such as padding. The
input frames are then buffered in preparation for transmission.
Figure 2 Encoding and Decoding Module Operation
The two major units within the encoder and decoder are the protocol unit and encoding/decoding unit.
While the encoding and decoding units strictly perform encoding or decoding over a set of buffered

frames, the protocol unit manages the communication process, including decisions on whether to send
coded or uncoded frames, and how to perform coding.
RLNC allows for multiple coding schemes (see inset below). For example, one simple block code would
require input frames to be transmitted in fixed-‐size blocks, followed by a pre-‐determined number of
coded frames. In this case, the protocol unit would require the encoder to generate the coded frames
in time to be transmitted at the end of each block. The protocol unit at the destination would assemble
the blocks, decode any missing packets, and output the completed blocks. Some coding schemes
require feedback between the protocol units at the source and destination, as discussed below.
Reliable AC-‐3 Audio Bitstream
The stream of Figure 1 may be a 192kbps enhanced AC-‐3 bitstream composed of 768-‐byte frames, each
representing a 32ms interval of time once decoded at 48KHz. These synframes, or access units, carry
their own error-‐detection checksums. They would typically be mapped into HTTP messages or RTP
packets and encapsulated into UDP or TCP, depending on the application. IP packets would in turn carry
those transport segments across the service provider’s network, where typical packet losses may reach
3%. (Note that packet losses may be much higher in mobile access, wireless meshes, and satellite links)
RLNC reference implementations are available wherever a software patch is easiest to install, including
the application-‐layer (typically over UDP) and the kernel (TCP, IP). However, RLNC is not layer-‐
dependent. For instance, RLNC can be seamlessly cascaded under any proprietary source coding, as
shown in Figure 1.
In that configuration, the RLNC encoder could use synframes as input frames (see Figure 2). Assuming
the simple block code described above is applied over a connection experiencing uniform 1% synframe
losses, and assuming 30-‐frame blocks were used, the encoder would need to append one coded frame to
each block. The 3.33% redundancy would be sufficient to cover any lost or corrupted frames. The RLNC
protocol unit at the receiver may utilize the synframes’ built-‐in error-‐detection scheme. Note that the
choice of the block size and redundancy are subject to multiple channel and application factors, including
loss statistics (e.g., burst sizes) and receiver delay sensitivity (e.g., playback buffer size).
It is important to emphasize that the above coding example uses RLNC as a classical block channel code
without feedback. Although RLNC has superior tunability in such settings, its unique latency gains and
versatility advantages are highlighted in applications and topologies where today’s channel codes cannot
operate, as illustrated in the remainder of this document.
What differentiates RLNC from existing channel codes is its tunability. RLNC is in principle agnostic to
the source coding or type of traffic being carried. Hence, parameters such as packet recovery
probability, latency, jitter, energy consumption, channel utilization, and encoding/decoding complexity
can be adjusted for different applications.
The RLNC Encoding and Decoding Process

In the example of Figure 1, four encoded packets are generated from the three native stream packets[2].
The encoded packets are labeled by the summation symbol Σ, indicating that they are linear
combinations of the native packets. Figure 3 illustrates how one encoded packet can be generated from
three native packets. First, a random coefficient is generated for each uncoded, or native, packet.
Symbol-‐wise coding is then performed to generate the coded packet. A symbol may represent any unit
of digital data such as bit or byte. Each symbol of the resulting coded packet is a linear combination of
three corresponding symbols in the native packets. Each new coded packet –while having the same
number of bits– thus carries a unique mathematical representation of the native packets.


Figure 3 RLNC Encoding Process
In the example of Figure 3, receiving any three linearly independent packets is sufficient to decode the
three original packets. The number of additional coded packets (i.e., the redundancy) can be optimized
so that it closely matches the channel loss.
Decoding reverses the linear operations of Figure 3 through Gaussian elimination, a customary
algorithm for solving systems of linear equations. In Figure 4, the right-‐side coefficient entries are
generated through this process. Gaussian elimination typically requires a number of arithmetic
operations that are in the order of n3, where n is the number of input packets. Importantly, RLNC can
use coded, uncoded, and partial packets to decode (see Figure 4), leading to lower complexity and
easier integration with existing distributed systems.
Figure 4 Decoding
RLNC Overhead
Like any form of coding, RLNC comes with two main costs. First, there is a computational cost
associated with the complexity of encoding and decoding RLNC packets. Second, there is a header
overhead associated with the size of the header in each coded packet. Unlike other coding schemes,
these costs in RLNC are strongly dependent on the application. This is because the simplicity of the
RLNC algorithm allows for a number of tradeoffs that limit such costs. Following are three examples of
parameters that strongly influence both computational and packet overheads:
• Field/Symbol Size: The symbol size (i.e., the number of bits allocated to the encoding symbols of
Figure 3) governs the field size (i.e., the number of coefficients that can be represented by such a
symbol). For example, a byte-‐sized symbol means that the field has 28 = 256 elements. The field
size determines the complexity of the finite field operations involved in computing and decoding
the linear combinations. In addition, it clearly impacts the size of each coefficient in the coding
header.
• Block Size: The block size is the number of packets to be coded together. Small blocks incur lower
computational complexity. In addition, they require a shorter list of coefficients, hence producing
smaller coding headers. On the other hand, larger blocks enable finer granularity in determining
the proportion of non-‐redundant packets (i.e., the code rate), thus enabling more efficient
adjustment to channel losses.
• Coding Density: The coding density represents the proportion of packets represented within each
coded packet. In RLNC, a linear combination can involve any subset of the block packets. Full RLNC

(i.e., representing every packet in each linear combination) is the most computationally intensive
and requires a longer coding header.
• Topology: An end-‐to-‐end topology such as the one shown in Figure 1 can greatly reduce the packet
overhead by using seeds instead of explicit coefficients. This applies to any single-‐hop network such
as most wireless access networks.
Unlike any other channel code, RLNC can modify all of the parameters listed above dynamically to trade
performance for reduced complexity. It should be noted that in almost all existing implementations,
the performance gains in latency, energy consumption, throughput, and channel utilization, have
justified the described computational and overhead costs (see listed references).
Appendix 2
RLNC’s Multiple Encoding Schemes
Unlike traditional Channel Codes, RLNC allows for multiple transport schemes while using simple linear
algebra to encode and decode. This capability is a function of RLNC using random coefficients within a
suitable field size to generate linear combinations. The simplicity of this random coefficient generation
means that the RLNC algorithm can be applied at any node and any layer. More importantly, it means
that the code can be carried with data. Those two unique attributes are the source of RLNC’s
versatility[2] and provide the a number of encoding schemes where traditional codes are limited to one
(Block Coding):
• Block Coding: In block coding, RLNC operates as a
conventional block code, where packets are
assembled in blocks and then coded together. In
RLNC, feedback provides powerful performance
optimization tools. For instance, both the block size
and the redundancy level (proportion of additional
coded packets) can vary dynamically if information
on received packets is available.
• On-‐the-‐Fly Coding: Unlike traditional codes, RLNC
does not require the encoder to receive the entire
block before starting coded transmissions. Such on-‐ Figure 5 RLNC Coding Capabilities
the-‐fly coding allows for more flexible transmission
schemes, particularly in streaming applications [3].
• Sliding-‐Window Coding: RLNC has the singular capability to depart from the block-‐coding paradigm
and adopt a sliding-‐window approach: Each coded packet becomes a representation of the
transmitter’s current sliding window, as shown in Figure 5. In sliding-‐window coding, the
transmitter is also coding new arriving packets on the fly. However, this approach enables both
transmitter and receiver to coordinate window-‐decoding events (through coordinating encoding
and redundancy). This enables the control of application-‐layer latency while preserving the code’s
reliability features.
• Systematic Coding: To minimize decoding complexity in end-‐to-‐end schemes, it is desirable to
transmit the native packets ahead of any coded packet, a process called systematic coding.
Reliable AC-‐3 Audio Bitstream – Revisited
The example of p.4 uses RLNC as a conventional block code to protect an enhanced AC-‐3 audio bitsteam
against a unifirm 1% frame loss. Using such a basic block code is inadequate when losses become
dynamic (e.g., when loss bursts occur). For instance, if the average losses remained at 1% but bursts of

20% were likely occur over a single-‐block period, the block code would need to carry 20% redundancy at
all times (i.e., 6 coded frames for each 30-‐frame block), leading to bandwidth inefficiency. The
alternative would be to lose the entire block whenever burst losses occurred.
Faced with burst losses, the most efficient and robust reliability schemes use feedback to let the
transmitter adapt the number of coded frames to current channel losses. RLNC is the only code that has
the flexibility of combining any set of packets at any time; it is therefore best suited for using feedback.
Consider the following RLNC sliding-‐window approach:
(1) The transmitter adds each new frame to the coding window.
(2) For each frame added to the coding window, the transmitter sends one coded frame. Each coded
frame is a representation of the entire coding window.
(3) The decoder sends an ACK for each received frame.
(4) Each ACK identifies the earliest frame that can be decoded using the received frames (i.e., earliest
seen frame) and the number of frames required to decode the current window (i.e., missing degrees
of freedom).
(5) Upon receiving an ACK, the transmitter slides the coding window by removing any seen frames.
(6) After sending 10 frames, the transmitter closes the window: it transmits the required number of
coded frames for decoding the current window. The transmitter then starts a new coding window
(step (1)).
Some of the notable advantages of the sliding-‐window approach are described below:
• Significant Latency Gains: Owing to RLNC's sliding window scheme, the transmitter can control the
coding window size using the thresholding mechanism in step (6) (e.g., number of frames sent, time
elapsed, number of missing degrees of freedom reached, etc.). This limits considerably the latency,
buffering, and processing requirements at the receiver. Although most frames will be passed to the
receiver application with no decoding delay at all, the worst-‐case decoding event (e.g., burst loss hits
early frame transmissions) involves decoding the first ten frames together, leading to a buffering
latency of 320ms followed by a 10-‐frame decoding event. In contrast, the block code (p.4) will always
need a 30-‐frame decoding event for each block. The average and peak buffering latencies in the block
scheme are 480ms (loss hitting the middle frame) and 960ms (loss hitting the first frame).
• Higher Bandwidth Efficiency: The RLNC sliding-‐window scheme will adapt to burst losses by
generating the exact amount of required coded frames (in step (6)). For example, a four-‐minute
stream (7500 synframes) experiencing 1% losses and fifty individual six-‐frame burst loss events would
lose 325 frames in total. The sliding-‐window approach would require precisely 325 additional
redundancy frames, or 4.33%. In contrast, the block code (p.4) would invariably add a 20% overhead to
all blocks (1500 frames). This leads to massive bandwidth gains in dynamic situations (e.g., mobile
networks or congested broadband networks).
• Lower Decoding Complexity: The delay trigger of step 6 enables the transmitter to control the size and
frequency of the decoding events. This creates a smoother throughput curve and lower frame
latencies at the receiver, but also controls the complexity of the decoding events.

Appendix 3
RLNC Multicasting Capabilities
In broadcast environments, RLNC can be combined with protocols such as NORM (NACK-‐Oriented
Reliable Multicast) to yield powerful broadcast capabilities. A notable RLNC-‐based NORM-‐enhancement
is the Speeding Multicast by Acknowledgment Reduction Technique (SMART) protocol [18], described
below.
SMART is an RLNC-‐based feedback protocol that uses a predictive model to determine the optimal
feedback time for a broadcast channel with a potentially large number of receivers. Scheduling the
feedback according to this predictive model is shown to reduce both the feedback traffic and

redundancy packet transmissions. SMART reduces per-‐packet completion time by 30-‐50% compared to
existing reliable multicast protocols over a wide range of file sizes, loss levels, and network sizes, hence
closely matching the performance of an omniscient transmitter requiring no feedback.
SMART exhibits strong QoE performance as well as scalability to increasing file sizes, varying channel
loss probabilities, and most notably, network size. Its predictive model is shown to be robust to
incorrect channel estimation, uncertainty on the number of receivers, NACK losses, and correlated
packet losses.
Appendix 4
RLNC’s Multipath Encoding
Since the code is embedded in each packet, RLNC renders packets interchangeable, and arrival order
irrelevant. The destination user needs only to assemble a sufficient number of packets, coded or
uncoded, in order to decode the stream. This means that RLNC allows networks to seamlessly combine
connections with wide-‐ranging loss, latency and bandwidth characteristics, without need for complex
scheduling.
Figure 6 Multipath Transport
Not only is no path coordination necessary at the source, RLNC also enables the combination of
multiple heterogeneous sources. In the example of Figure 6, the destination pulls content from two
distinct sources. The coded source (source 1) is able to transmit packets via two separate paths. The
uncoded source (source 2) uses a single path, as is customary in today’s networks. The receiver is able
to combine the first five arriving packets without any need for sources or path coordination. The loss of
one of the two paths by Source 1, depicted in Figure 6, would have dramatic consequences on the
stream without coding.
Several multipath implementations show that applying RLNC
across multiple channels yields the sum of the optimized
throughputs, without switching or coordination[6,9,10]. Coding over
multiple orthogonal wireless channels is expected to yield other
performance improvements, including security gains and
robustness against single-‐channel jamming or congestion.
Multi-‐sourced Streaming
Multimedia streaming is a major application of RLNC’s multipath
principle. To illustrate this, consider that the sources of Figure 6
are two server or cache sites (e.g., Netflix) hosting a coded version
of the requested media content. The receiver (e.g., home set top
Code On Proprietary and Confidential Figure 7 Coded WiFi Offloading 14

box or enterprise streaming device) can now switch dynamically from one site to the other depending
on availability and network quality, without service interruptions. Alternatively, it can download
packets simultaneously from both sites, without need for packet scheduling. This configuration allows
the provider to slash downtimes by distributing the load dynamically over different sites. Hot content
can also be shifted closer to the consumer in a more graceful manner.
WiFi Offload
Through its offloading capabilities, RLNC combines LTE reliability with WiFi bandwidths, thus improving
user QoE. An example is illustrated in Figure 7, where a receiver is able to receive a stream using both
its WiFi and LTE networks. In this case, RLNC offload capabilities not only provide higher data
throughput, but also allow networks to minimize transport costs by optimally combining expensive
reliable networks (e.g., LTE) with cheap unreliable ones (e.g., WiFi). This has been demonstrated
through OPNET simulations, where RLNC devices get the benefits of a full 4G connection for a fraction
(a few percent) of the 4G cost[11]. This channel bonding capability extends beyond WiFi offloading. In a
home theatre, for example, RLNC enables devices fitted with multiple WiFi interfaces to multiply their
WiFi bandwidth without need for major inter-‐channel scheduling.
Appendix 5
RLNC’s Recoding Gains
Recoding enables RLNC to uniquely adjust its coding overhead to local network conditions. In the toy
example of Figure 8, RLNC recoding is contrasted with conventional end-‐to-‐end coding. The common
scenario is the transmission of a 20-‐packet file from source (S) to destination (D) across a tandem
network where each of the three hops has a 10% packet loss. The example simulates the quality of
each link by showing packet losses in red above each link. End-‐to-‐end coding naturally requires the
provisioning of all the required redundancy at the source node. In this example, this redundancy
amounts to 37% of the native file size.
Figure 8 Recoding Illustrative Example
Recoding, on the other hand, enables RLNC to renew the redundancy at each intermediate node
without need for decoding. RLNC’s random co-‐ efficient generation and code embedding features allow
any intermediate node to participate in the coding process, in particular by recombining received

packets and by generating new redundancy packets. As a result, the required redundancy for RLNC
does not exceed the worst-‐case redundancy required at any hop, 11% in this example. Recoding hence
makes RLNC a uniquely composable code that is capable of adding redundancy only when and where
needed.
Appendix 6
Boosting Coding Speeds for Distributed Storage and CDNs
When it comes to sheer coding speeds, the RLNC library is significantly faster than industry standard
libraries. In a May-‐2014 measurement campaign, Kodo outperformed state-‐of-‐the-‐art storage libraries,
including ISA-‐L, Jerasure, and OpenFEC. Network World picked up the story[19]:

“RLNC performed 13% to 465% faster than the industry standard Reed-‐Solomon encoding in Storage
Area Network (SAN) erasure application testing. The Kodo library, using RLNC to encode and decode data
on a SAN for error correction and fault tolerance, was compared to Intel’s Reed-‐Solomon library
implementation, called ISA-‐L, and an open source library implementation called Jerasure. The
[19]
Kodo/RLNC implementation ran consistently faster on identical SAN hardware.”
RLNC’s main selling point is its unique capability to enable next-‐generation information infrastructure
by inherently providing unique features such as multipath transport, seamless distributed storage, and
robust streaming. Nevertheless, the reported benchmarking results illustrate RLNC’s readiness for
deployment as an alternative to existing storage and transport codes.
Appendix 7
RLNC Multi-‐Resolution Transport
RLNC offers a number of tools to optimize scalable transport in both point-‐to-‐point and multicast
topologies, as shown in Figure 9. Through the transcoding of base-‐ and enhancement-‐layer packets,
RLNC is capable of dynamically switching to different resolutions while maintaining reliability.

RLNC’s flexibility is illustrated by the multicasting setup of Figure 10, where all users receive both layers
irrespective of which packets were lost by each node.


Figure 9 RLNC Scalable Multimedia Figure 10 RLNC Scalable Multicasting

Multi-‐Channel Content Distribution
Figures 9 and 10 underline RLNC’s ability to transport a set of synchronous parallel streams, or
channels, while insuring that losses affect the lowest-‐priority channels first. In the example of Figure 9,
the base and enhancement layers may represent the high-‐ and low-‐priority channels, respectively. The
same principle can therefore be applied to a group of audio and video channels belonging to the same
media stream, sent independently during playback.
RLNC allows the dynamic allocation of redundancy across all channels. In the two-‐channel example of
Figure 9, as long as the allocated redundancy is capable of addressing aggregate losses, combining the
redundancy for the two channels is beneficial, as it insures that losses will not deteriorate any single
channel. This is also clear in the multicasting example of Figure 10, where RLNC insures the reception of
both channels for any two-‐packet loss configuration. Furthermore, RLNC enables the redundancy level
to tightly match channel losses if good feedback is provided. If losses exceed allocated redundancy,
however, low-‐priority channels (e.g., alternative dialog) can switch to transporting redundancy for the
main channels, as illustrated in Figure 9.

In a multiresolution stream scenario, the combination of dynamically adjusting resolution to bandwidth
(Fig. 9) and the property of serving heterogeneous devices (low-‐ and high-‐resolution) provides a very
versatile media stream. Such a stream will be efficient in terms of storage on the server[12] (as
mentioned above) and will be able to provide the same dynamic adjustment as multiple single-‐
resolution streams (e.g., with HTTP live streaming protocols) while being multicast-‐friendly.


References
[1] Code On Technologies (http://www.codeontechnologies.com/)
[2] Random Linear Network Coding: A Tutorial – Code On White Paper
[3] On the Delay Characteristics for Point-‐to-‐Point Links using Random Linear Network Coding with On-‐
the-‐Fly Coding Capabilities. European Wireless 2014.
[4] Access-‐Network Association Policies for Media Streaming in Heterogeneous Environments, CDC 2010
[5] Avoiding Interruptions -‐ a QoE Reliability Function for Streaming Media Applications, JSAC 2011
[6] Network Coded Software Defined Networking. European Wireless, 2015.
[7] Congestion Control for Coded Transport Layers, ICC 2014
[8] Network Coded TCP Performance over Satellite Networks. (http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.6635)
[9] Applying Network Coding to TCP. L. Urbina, MIT M.Eng. Thesis (2012).
[10] Multi-‐Path TCP with Network Coding for Heterogeneous Networks. Information Theory and
Applications Workshop (ITA) 2012.
[11] Network Coding with Association Policies in Heterogeneous Networks. IFIP TC 6th int. conf. on
Networking (2011)
[12] Resolution-‐aware network coded storage (http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.6864)
[13] Network Coding for Multi-‐Resolution Multicast, INFOCOM 2010
[14] On the Combination of Multi–Layer Source Coding and Network Coding for Wireless Networks, IEEE
CAMAD 2013
[15] Secure Network Coding for Multi-‐Resolution Wireless Video Streaming, IEEE JSAC, April 2010
[16] Supporting Dynamic Adaptive Streaming over HTTP in Wireless Meshed Networks using Random
Linear Network Coding. NetCod Symposium, June 2014.
[17] Throughput vs. Delay in Lossy Wireless Mesh Networks with Random Linear Network Coding.
European Wireless Conference, May 2014.
[18] Speeding Multicast by Acknowledgment Reduction Technique (SMART) Enabling Robustness of QoE to
the Number of Users. IEEE JSAC, August 2012.
[19] Network World (http://www.networkworld.com/article/2342846/data-‐breach/how-‐mit-‐and-‐caltech-‐s-‐
coding-‐breakthrough-‐could-‐accelerate-‐mobile-‐network-‐speeds.html)
[20] Can network coding bridge the digital divide in the Pacific? The University of Auckland — in progress.
[21] Cloudflare.com (https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-‐us/articles/200172446-‐CloudFlare-‐Post-‐
Mortem-‐from-‐Outage-‐on-‐March-‐3-‐2013)
[22] Distributed Cloud Storage Using Network Coding. IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking
Conference (CCNC), 2014.
[23] Implementation and Performance Evaluation of Distributed Cloud Storage Solutions using Random
Linear Network Coding. IEEE ICC 2014.
[24] Toward Sustainable Networking: Storage area networks with network coding. Allerton, 2012
[25] Kodo Library, Steinwurf (http://steinwurf.com/kodo/)


Code On Network Coding For 5G Evolution PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Code On Network Coding For 5G Evolution PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Network Coding: Evolving to 5G

“Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability.”

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 1

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 2

Use Case 4: Improving Throughput with Superior Multicast Protocols

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 3

Use Case 6: RLNC’s Inherent Security

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 4

Use Case 7: RLNC’s New Ultra-­‐High Reliability Tools

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 5

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 6

Use Case 12: Towards Mobile Storage and Millisecond Latency

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 7

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 8

Figure 1 End-­‐to-­‐End Coding

Figure 2 Encoding and Decoding Module Operation

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 9

The RLNC Encoding and Decoding Process

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 10

Figure 3 RLNC Encoding Process

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 11

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 12

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 13

Figure 6 Multipath Transport

Code On Proprietary and Confidential Figure 7 Coded WiFi Offloading 14

Figure 8 Recoding Illustrative Example

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 15

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 16

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 17

Code On Proprietary and Confidential 18

You might also like

Use Case 7: RLNC’s New Ultra-‐High Reliability Tools

Figure 1 End-‐to-‐End Coding